Cliches

I think the criticism of the Taylor Wessing's "obsession" with images of sullen teenagers is that these are such predictable subjects, and when subject matter becomes predictable it has also become cliched.

Just because it's serious "art" photography doesn't mean it's any less tired than a landscape picture of a rock in the foreground and a mountain in the background, upon which most BJP readers would look down their noses, precisely for being such a cliche.

Let's reward innovation in photography.

BTW, I love the winning image.

What a fool!

Images empty of content, without even the semblance of a minimum of culture. Abundant only technical defects. But what the jury did so severe destruction of the true Photography?

...Sigh...!

I see that the emperor's new clothes are alive and well! I'm fairly new to photography, so forgive me my ignorance. Are these two images supposed to be photographic art. One's a snapshot and the other's a pocket camera shot of some bloke's mrs. with her giblets hanging out. How pleasant! Oh, I'm sorry, but being 'new' to photography obviously hasn't honed my eye into what is considered 'art'. I've seen better images in the Reader's Wives sections of certain magazines, and as for the huntress, it may just as well be called the 'Picked up some road kill on the way home' as there is no allusion to any hunting whatsoever, unless she 'took it out' with her bare hands.!
Art, my rear end!

WINNER

Having followed and entered the TW / NPG competition for a few years, I can fully understand why it comes in for such stick.
However, in there are some very strong images – including this year’s winner.
In the BJP article above however, I am left wondering if that’s a woman’s giblets (quote) or a man’s in the small picture.
Regardless, I still think the winning images of late have been strong visual portraits and the exhibition worthy of a visit.

His British Wife

Today, I visited the National Portrait Gallery for the Taylor Wessing Portrait Prize, 2010. The second prize was awarded to Panayiotis Lamprou, who, in fact, submitted his 'British Wife'. It has only been eleven days since the exhibition started and the Internet is already full of articles regarding the image and the long, never ending and sometimes even tiring discourse of whether this can be considered as art or if it is pornography.
But beyond the logistics of labeling the picture as porn or art, we should consider its heavily encoded title. Since the advent of the medium, we have seen myriads of images of this kind and there are myriads to be disseminated and circulated in the years to come. However, the very essence of the photograph is hidden not within its frame, but rather in its anchored text, which bears all the meaning and controls the reading of the image.
The photographer has used three words to describe his portrait, which he shot during their vacation on the Greek island of Schinousa. Namely, these are: 1) My, 2)British and 3)Wife. Let me try to deconstruct the words in relation to this particular image, but also in relation to the cultural burden they happen to carry.
The word 'my' is a possessive pronominal adjective. It indicates a possession, that something belongs to someone. The photographer wants to make this statement clear, i.e 'what you see is mine'. And this statement relates not only to the visual representation of his wife, but it extends to the physical aspect of it.
Then we have the word 'British', which has two functions here. One is to connote that he, the photographer, is not British. Otherwise he would have simply omitted the word and used the title 'My Wife'. In addition, by stating her nationality he distances himself from her and portrays her as 'Other'.
Moreover and in relation to the above, during the summer holidays thousands of British tourists, both male and female, visit the Greek islands. What the greek islands have to offer is an escape from the problems of everyday life, fresh air, warm sun and a calm sea. Once the sun sets this calmness gives way to a frenzied nightlife with excessive amounts of alcohol, something which naturally leads to a fast food type of sexual encounters. This has resulted in the stereotypical notion of female tourists being an 'easy prey' for a night of lust among the male population.
Let us move on to the third word, 'wife'. The word wife bears a status of respect. It is not 'just' a girlfriend or a partner, but something more than that. She is a Wife and in this case Lamprou's Wife. By introducing someone as 'my husband' or 'my wife' it implies a mutual bond between the parties and also a possession. This mutual bond is clearly showcased by her gaze and relaxed pose, which she kindly offers to her husband-photographer. As his wife, she becomes an active agent in the image, not by being represented by her husband, but rather presenting herself to him and to the camera.
Lamprou thus puts a barrier between his exposed wife and the voyeur. The voyeur is us the spectators, but also himself. Between himself and his wife there is the camera, but also a physical barrier within the image, which is the chair. As far as we are concerned, we are reminded that this is 'his wife' and therefore she should be seen as 'sacred', 'valuable' and 'untouchable'.
Of course, we do not know the conditions under which the couple, or rather the husband and wife met and this is not of interest here. We also do not know whether the photographer consciously chose this title or not. However, Lamprou, although has fully exposed his wife to us, he has put a safety net around her, which are his three chosen words. The title works as a veil or even a cage for protecting her. She sits there comfortably naked, looking straight to the camera and in extension to us. Our mind can spin with fantasies, but the title is there to castrate our thoughts and to remind us that she only belongs to Lamprou.Lamprou thus puts a barrier between his exposed wife and the voyeur. The voyeur is us the spectators, but also himself. Between himself and his wife there is the camera, but also a physical barrier within the image, which is the chair. As far as we are concerned, we are reminded that this is 'his wife' and therefore she should be seen as 'sacred', 'valuable' and 'untouchable'.
Of course, we do not know the conditions under which the couple, or rather the husband and wife met and this is not of interest here. We also do not know whether the photographer consciously chose this title or not. However, Lamprou, although has fully exposed his wife to us, he has put a safety net around her, which are his three chosen words. The title works as a veil or even a cage for protecting her. She sits there comfortably naked, looking straight to the camera and in extension to us. Our mind can spin with fantasies, but the title is there to castrate our thoughts and to remind us that she only belongs to Lamprou.

efstratiou's indulgence

To efstratiou (comment below) despite your self indulgent ramblings below. I think you may be wrong, if you would like to dissect the meaning of three words to this absurd degree then please feel free to waste your time, however I think the photographer is simply referring to his wife's genitals looking like a rose.

regarding my indulgence

My dear friend 'boredofthis',

Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose
Loveliness extreme.
Extra gaiters,
Loveliness extreme.
Sweetest ice-cream.
Pages ages page ages page ages.

-Gertrude Stein

What about the light in My British Wife

As a judge i would have scored it 75. The dappled light ruins it for me, oh and the penis was distracting too

thanks

Thanks to Nikos for a comprehensive explanation - it was perfect.

When the camera club folks move into the 20th century perhaps they can be taken seriously, but they do need to develop some photographic literacy before venting their outrage and ill-informed comments here. "Would I hang it in my wall" and comments about the emperor's tailor seem to be synonymous with an ambition to put LRPS after their name, and you obviously don't realise into what a small box this puts you.

Thanks also to Mark for his comment on his own personal reaction :-)

As if...

nikos efstratiou old son, you really need to get out more and probably climb out of your own backside once in a while, Utter pseudo-intellectual garbage. And the BJP publishes it! LOL. NB if your fatuous post was supposed to be ironic or a postmodern pastiche then it failed to hit home.